scholarly journals Demystifying the Effectiveness of the Impact Factor and Proposing Alternative Research Assessment Means

2012 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stathis Avramidis
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Research Assessment ◽  
Alternative Research ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals Quality weighted citations versus total citations in the sciences and social sciences, with an application to finance and accounting

2016 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 324-337 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chia-Lin Chang ◽  
Michael McAleer
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Research Assessment ◽  
Academic Journal ◽  
Additional Measure ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Thomson Reuters ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Article Influence

Purpose – Both journal self-citations and exchanged citations have the effect of increasing a journal’s impact factor, which may be deceptive. The purpose of this paper is to analyse academic journal quality and research impact using quality-weighted citations vs total citations, based on the widely used Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science citations database (ISI). A new Index of Citations Quality (ICQ) is presented, based on quality-weighted citations. Design/methodology/approach – The new index is used to analyse the leading 500 journals in both the sciences and social sciences, as well as finance and accounting, using quantifiable Research Assessment Measures (RAMs) that are based on alternative transformations of citations. Findings – It is shown that ICQ is a useful additional measure to 2-year impact factor (2YIF) and other well-known RAMs for the purpose of evaluating the impact and quality, as well as ranking, of journals as it contains information that has very low correlations with the information contained in the well-known RAMs for both the sciences and social sciences, and finance and accounting. Practical implications – Journals can, and do, inflate the number of citations through self-citation practices, which may be coercive. Another method for distorting journal impact is through a set of journals agreeing to cite each other, that is, by exchanging citations. This may be less coercive than self-citations, but is nonetheless unprofessional and distortionary. Social implications – The premise underlying the use of citations data is that higher quality journals generally have a higher number of citations. The impact of citations can be distorted in a number of ways, both consciously and unconsciously. Originality/value – Regardless of whether self-citations arise through collusive practices, the increase in citations will affect both 2YIF and 5-year impact factor (5YIF), though not Eigenfactor and Article Influence. This leads to an ICQ, where a higher ICQ would generally be preferred to lower. Unlike 5YIF, which is increased by journal self-citations and exchanged citations, and Eigenfactor and Article Influence, both of which are affected by quality-weighted exchanged citations, ICQ will be less affected by exchanged citations. In the absence of any empirical evidence to the contrary, 5YIF and AI are assumed to be affected similarly by exchanged citations.

Publication Specific Impact of Articles Published by Rheological Journals

2005 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 406-409 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Kröger
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Research Assessment ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Formal Basis ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Specific Impact ◽  
Number Of Authors

Abstract The Impact Factor of a journal is a quantitative way of assessing its worth and relevance to the academic community it serves. Many librarians see the ratio between Impact Factor and price as a suitable yardstick by which to measure the value of their collections. In addition, the research assessment exercises which, in many countries, are now being carried out on a more formal basis mean that authors submitting original research must publish it in a journal with the highest perceived worth possible in order to secure future funding, job promotions and peer recognition. It has been suspected [T. Opthof, Cardiovasc. Res. 33 (1997) 1; J. Stegmann, Nature 390 (1990) 550], however, that a particular author’s impact is not much related to the journals in which her/he publishes. As will be demonstrated in this letter, the impact of articles published in rheological journals is largely influenced by criteria such as length of article, number of authors, number of cited references.

scholarly journals Use of the journal impact factor for assessing individual articles: Statistically flawed or not?

F1000Research ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 366
Author(s):  
Ludo Waltman ◽  
Vincent A. Traag
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
San Francisco ◽  
Journal Impact Factor ◽  
Dominant Role ◽  
Research Assessment ◽  
Primary Focus ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Journal Impact ◽  
Accurate Indicator

Most scientometricians reject the use of the journal impact factor for assessing individual articles and their authors. The well-known San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment also strongly objects against this way of using the impact factor. Arguments against the use of the impact factor at the level of individual articles are often based on statistical considerations. The skewness of journal citation distributions typically plays a central role in these arguments. We present a theoretical analysis of statistical arguments against the use of the impact factor at the level of individual articles. Our analysis shows that these arguments do not support the conclusion that the impact factor should not be used for assessing individual articles. Using computer simulations, we demonstrate that under certain conditions the number of citations an article has received is a more accurate indicator of the value of the article than the impact factor. However, under other conditions, the impact factor is a more accurate indicator. It is important to critically discuss the dominant role of the impact factor in research evaluations, but the discussion should not be based on misplaced statistical arguments. Instead, the primary focus should be on the socio-technical implications of the use of the impact factor.

scholarly journals Use of the journal impact factor for assessing individual articles need not be statistically wrong

F1000Research ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 366
Author(s):  
Ludo Waltman ◽  
Vincent A. Traag
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
San Francisco ◽  
Journal Impact Factor ◽  
Dominant Role ◽  
Research Assessment ◽  
Primary Focus ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Journal Impact

Most scientometricians reject the use of the journal impact factor for assessing individual articles and their authors. The well-known San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment also strongly objects against this way of using the impact factor. Arguments against the use of the impact factor at the level of individual articles are often based on statistical considerations. The skewness of journal citation distributions typically plays a central role in these arguments. We present a theoretical analysis of statistical arguments against the use of the impact factor at the level of individual articles. Our analysis shows that these arguments do not support the conclusion that the impact factor should not be used for assessing individual articles. In fact, our computer simulations demonstrate the possibility that the impact factor is a more accurate indicator of the value of an article than the number of citations the article has received. It is important to critically discuss the dominant role of the impact factor in research evaluations, but the discussion should not be based on misplaced statistical arguments. Instead, the primary focus should be on the socio-technical implications of the use of the impact factor.

scholarly journals The Impact Factor as a measuring tool of the prestige of the journals in research assessment in mathematics

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 306-314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonia Ferrer-Sapena ◽  
Enrique A. Sánchez-Pérez ◽  
Fernanda Peset ◽  
Luis-Millán González ◽  
Rafael Aleixandre-Benavent
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Research Assessment ◽  
Measuring Tool ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Prestige

The unknown acquaintance, or the impact factor and others

2007 ◽  
Vol 148 (4) ◽  
pp. 165-171
Author(s):  
Anna Berhidi ◽  
Edit Csajbók ◽  
Lívia Vasas
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Citation Analysis ◽  
Index Number ◽  
Scientific Performance ◽  
H Index ◽  
Master List ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Impact

Nobody doubts the importance of the scientific performance’s evaluation. At the same time its way divides the group of experts. The present study mostly deals with the models of citation-analysis based evaluation. The aim of the authors is to present the background of the best known tool – Impact factor – since, according to the authors’ experience, to the many people use without knowing it well. In addition to the „nonofficial impact factor” and Euro-factor, the most promising index-number, h-index is presented. Finally new initiation – Index Copernicus Master List – is delineated, which is suitable to rank journals. Studying different indexes the authors make a proposal and complete the method of long standing for the evaluation of scientific performance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document